User talk:SkyWarrior/Archive 4

THIS IS A TALK PAGE ARCHIVE Please do NOT edit this page. If you leave a message here, I will not respond to it. Click here to return to my active talk page

Swap of talk archive

Please undo your swap of Talk:Jon Jafari/Archive 1 with Talk:JonTron/Archive 1. It was a mistake. GeoffreyT2000 ^{(talk, contribs)} 04:43, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

 Done. SkyWarrior 13:13, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Hatted discussions are not closed discussions...

... especially when hatted by a regular editor rather than an admin as part of an official discussion "closure". But whatever.Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:42, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Oh, and I got an edit conflict while editing, I didn't actually mean to revert you because, like I said, don't really care that much. Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:42, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

That's where you're wrong, Volunteer Marek. From the template page itself:

This template is placed at the top of a discussion (and {{hidden archive bottom}} or {{hab}} at the bottom), and is used to close a discussion and discourage further editing without removing it completely from the page.

Not to mention that the template explicitly says that "the following discussion has been closed" and not to modify it any further. SkyWarrior 19:47, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Re: Marcus Hutchins

Hi there! As I mentioned in the edit summary, although Marcus Hutchins may be initially known for stopping the attack, I believe the subsequent coverage regarding his arrest belong to a separate article, because the arrest is not due to his role in the WannaCry ransomware attack. Hutchins seems to have received sufficient reliable coverage to meet the general notability guideline on his own. Thanks, Tony Tan · talk 01:39, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm going to give this some more thought, Tony Tan, if you don't mind. If I end up agreeing with you, then this will be the last of our conversation about Hutchins. But if I don't, then expect a merge discussion in the near future. SkyWarrior 01:51, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

How to prevent changes

I'm not sure how to prevent changes or protect an article. For whatever reason there is, people have been editing or deleting relevant information from the Abella Danger article. Any information on how to prevent this. Along with any help, would be greatly welcome. Thank you. Scenicview1 (talk) 16:08, 6 August 2017 (UTC)Scenicview1

WP:BRD is the relevant page here, Scenicview1. Essentially, the best option is to discuss the contested changes, either with the person who reverted you directly or on the talk page. Try not to re-revert repeatedly to your preferred version instead, as it could get you blocked from editing.

Also keep in mind that no one owns articles, and as such anyone can edit most articles (provided the article is not protected). SkyWarrior 18:49, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Moose (drinking game)

Wow, I must say, this is probably the first time I've ever run across a set of edits where another editor was considering moving a page the same time I was. I think we ran across some edit conflicts, and in the process, I had to create Moose (drink game). You moved Moose (Drinking Game) to Moose (drinking game) at about the same time I was going to. I mean wow ... huge coincidence? Steel1943 (talk) 23:51, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Probably not a coincidence, considering the fact that I just found your move on Recent Changes, although my initial thought when finding your edit was "what the hell are they doing?", so I moved it to correct/fix you. But maybe it is a coincidence, I don't know. :p But it's fixed now, right? SkyWarrior 23:58, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I was in the process of doing a "round-about" move per the WP:PAGEMOVER guidelines. However, it did not help matters that I originally moved the article to a disambiguator with the capitalization set as "drinking Game". So, I tried to correct that ASAP, but then these edit conflict arose. (If I find any issues with other editors' moves, I usually wait a few minutes before doing anything to avoid conflicts in the event they realized what they had done; I had to move the article back to "Drinking Game" to also suppress the redirect I left there since I meant to remove it ... since that's how the round-about moves have to be done. Oh well.) Anyways, I have an idea: Would you be okay if I swap the edit histories of the "Drinking Game" redirect and the "drink game" redirect so that you can then tag the "drink game" redirect for WP:G7? If not, that's okay; I'm just trying to find some quick way to get the "drink game" redirect removed. Steel1943 (talk) 00:12, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

That's fine, do what needs to be done. SkyWarrior 00:14, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

All right, I have performed the aforementioned page moves. Steel1943 (talk) 00:22, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

And I have tagged the redirect for G7 (hopefully the correct one). Thanks. SkyWarrior 00:24, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Joe Kolodziej.

Hi there, thanks for the recent notice. I have tried to talk with the user and attempt to find out why he continues to undo my edits (see edit history). What options do i have? I have added referenced copy to the article, the items being added are controversial, but truthful. I believe that I am editing by the rules, howvever the user undoing the edits admits to being the person referenced in the article and seems to want to keep any negative material offline, you can appreciate that it would be hard to get conscientious in this instance. This isn't the first time that he has done this, see see the May/June edit. Any help/advise you can offer would be appreciated. Thetruthabouthockey (talk) 17:15, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response, Thetruthabouthockey. Your best bet is to talk to the editor who's reverting you directly, in a neutral, civil way (and not like this); a simple "can you please explain why you're reverting me?" or the like should suffice. Alternatively, you can start a discussion on the talk page about the edits. But whatever you do, do not reinstate the edits; you're already past 3RR and re-reverting again could result in a block for you. SkyWarrior 15:48, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Article of conflict of interest

Please add a new review http://www.compulsivereader.com/2017/08/01/a-review-of-prisms-particles-and-refractions-by-carol-smallwood/

Please clean up my entry about an article conflict. Like the one above, they have been reviewed by editors about relationships.

Thank you for volunteering!Carol Smallwood (talk) 20:31, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

I don't think I can do that, Carol. None of your other books' reviews are on the page, so adding the reviews for this single book would be undue weight. SkyWarrior 15:51, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Joseph Lycett

Dear Skywarrior, the Source for my edits on Joseph Lycett is an online scan of the ORIGINAL burial certificate (provided by Ancestry). The facts all fit with the man: name (unusual), age, exact place. So, my edit should stand. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.223.197.101 (talk) 21:17, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

"general convention"

The results of ANEW reports are really only meant to serve as a quick reference to other admins - I purposely marked mine as disputed (twice) in the results. Please do not non-admin clerk ANEW. Thanks -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 20:48, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

There's nothing saying I can't do it, so technically I can still do it (as far as I'm aware), regardless of what you told me. Now, that doesn't mean I should, and I (probably) won't from now one (probably), but... I'm just one of those people who wants things uniform, you know? SkyWarrior 20:54, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

It's not an issue, and there was no need to revert my message really.. you're more than welcome to continue doing it up until the point it becomes disruptive, which to be fair you'd really need to try to do! I would expect that if someone purposely does something twice, you'd assume they were meaning to do it, and perhaps leave them a message asking why instead of continuing to remove it? Maybe that's just me, I apologise if I came across a little harsh Keep up your great work here and happy editing! -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 21:00, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Investment

I'd like to invite you to join the Investment WikiProject. There are a lot of Investment related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help get this project off the ground and a few Investment pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks!

Cheers!WikiEditCrunch (talk) 20:22, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, but no thanks, I'm not interested in investment articles. Good luck on the Wikiproject, though. SkyWarrior 02:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! WikiEditCrunch (talk) 09:11, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello SkyWarrior, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

Technology update:

• Rentier has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.

General project update:

• The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
• Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Blog Inquiry

Hey SkyWarrior,

Hope you're doing well.

I came across your page through researching the edits of a few music-related Wikipedia pages and wanted to get in touch as I'm currently working on a blog to discuss best practices / tips for Wikipedia and thought I'd reach out to see if this is something you'd want to be involved in.

Let me know your thoughts. I would email you but I already emailed a few people today and that action is currently throttled for me. Please email me back (on my user page) if you’re interested. Thanks!

CMCreator900 (talk) 23:57, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

You made an error

I did NOT make an edit on any page recently. Please get your facts together before accusing someone of something. Ridiculous!! Bye!

Revisiting autopsy photo

I've followed some of the discussions about the autopsy photo here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_autopsy#The_gunshot_wound_to_the_head

and read the relevant guideline pages you've linked in previous reverts.

Are exceptions to these guidelines not warranted in some cases? I was reading the page in question today and I think it is important to acknowledge that seeing that image without warning may be upsetting for some people. It certainly is a gruesome photograph and not something a reader would expect to see without warning. News, video and audio media often preface gruesome content with a warning, allowing the viewer/listening to decide if they would like to continue. I'm not advocating removing the image. Previous edits required revealing a box to see the image? Why is this not a suitable compromise in an exceptional case?

Thanks.

SabreWolfy (talk) 15:29, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi there SabreWolfy. WP:NDA is the main relevant guideline here. It essentially states that diclaimers should not go into articles, and the warning box around the image in dispute would be considered a dsiclaimer. Therefore, the box was removed as an NDA violation. Yes, it's a gruesome image, but NDA doesn't allow disclaimers in articles.

Now, of course, exceptions can and do exist, but it would require a consensus to give that exception in this case, given the controversial nature of this situation. SkyWarrior 16:59, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. How do we get consensus? From whom? SabreWolfy (talk) 18:11, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

@SabreWolfy: you get consensus by, among other ways, starting a discussion on the talk page of the article the dispute is located at (in this case, Talk:John F. Kennedy autopsy). This can be in the form of a request for comment or just a simple discussion. From there, other editors give their views on the subject and if, after a period of time (30 days for an RfC barring any snowfall), the discussion is closed by an uninvolved editor either in support or against the proposal. If no consensus is reached, then nothing happens (in other words, the page stays the same as if the discussion never happened). See WP:CONSENSUS for more details. SkyWarrior 18:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

My submission is in review

Hello, sorry to bother you. I have an article in second review and I have not heard yet whether the article has been accepted or not. Is there any way for me to contact the reviewer or ask for a speedier reviewer? What are the rules? And the etiquette? Can you help? ExNeddiesBoy (talk) 02:36, 8 October 2017 (UTC)ExNeddiesBoy

I'm assuming you mean Draft:Cynthia Curry, ExNeddiesBoy? If so, you could always ask the previous reviewer, 97198, to re-review. Asking for a speedier reviewer will not help anything, however; the articles for creation process is backlogged, which means it will take some time for your article to be reviewed. You submitted the draft for review a week ago; it can take more than a month for an article to be reviewed. Be patient. SkyWarrior 03:13, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

WHAT DO YOU MEAN MY SANTA CLAUSE PLOT DESCRIPTION WASENT GOOD?

MY PLOT SUMMARY WAS BEAUTIFUL AND PERFECT WITH NO FLAWS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.104.109.235 (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Vandalism attack

@SkyWarrior: Just wanted to say thanks for everything you did with this. Every time I went to revert their vandalism, you already had. Well done. And it's noticed. Operator873^CONNECT 02:16, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome, Operator873. The user's blocked now (thanks Acroterion). SkyWarrior 02:19, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Page history

• Please restore the page history of 2017–18 Alpine Skiing World Cup. It was lost after some moves. 185.26.183.65 (talk) 03:16, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

  I think I did what I can do, essentially reverting Greenock125's copy-paste move. I can't actually merge article histories as I am not an administrator, but this should suffice for now. SkyWarrior 19:00, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Re: Removing move requests at WP:RM/TR

My sincerest apologies, I thought I looked through all the pages, guess not. It won't happen again. JE98 (talk) 02:15, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

It's fine, all is forgiven. Just keep in mind what I said on your talk page. SkyWarrior 02:24, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you SkyWarrior for your input.

I am having a difficult time understanding how to edit Wikipedia. Will keep trying. Reply not necessary. Laceheart22 (talk) 04:15, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

DENYing

Well, quite; per this, the discussion in question itself has been deleted. Happy days. Take care, — fortunavelut luna 16:55, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

John Napier Edits

Hello, SkyWarrior! If you take a closer look at the page before my edit, you'll notice that the whole page is essentially printed twice, i.e. duplicated. If you will kindly reinstate the change or refrain from reversing the change that I will make again right now, we will be able to solve this issue.

Thank you, alexdloia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexdloia (talk • contribs) 03:49, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

You're right, Alexdloia, sorry, I was using an automated tool when reverting, and I guess I must've looked over the edit summary. I have self-reverted. SkyWarrior 03:52, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Cleanup on aisle Nazism?: moving

...where? There I am, minding my own business, responding to something....and suddenly it ain't there. I get called away to a phone call, and now I find it's on ANI. I do not think that is the place to discuss whether closing an ongoing discussion 5 or six times constitutes edt-warring...and, of course, whether re-opening the same &cet. Anmccaff (talk) 05:01, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi Anmccaff. Let me first say that, yes, I probably should have said in my edit summary where I was moving the discussion to, though I did ping you at the ANI thread letting you know I did move it there. I guess that didn't suffice, so I apologize for that inconvienence.

As for whether or not ANI is the place to have the discussion: it wasn't much that ANI was the correct place to have the discussion but rather that AN3 was the wrong place to have it. AN3 is supposed to be for direct reports of users who have violated 3RR/1RR or are otherwise edit warring, not general discussion on "whether closing an ongoing discussion 5 or six times constitutes edt-warring". I chose to move it to ANI because I felt that it was a more appropriate place for the discussion, though in hindsight regular AN, some other dispute resolution board or even simply the AN3 talk page probably would've sufficed. SkyWarrior 11:48, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Well, I think the point raised was a very narrow one, which stood a chance of being directly addressed on AN3, but was certain to erupt into a second free-for-all at ANI, as it did, of course, spilling back onto the Nasti article itself....with the central question still unanswered. Just out of curiosity, what would your personal take on that be? Anmccaff (talk) 18:05, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

I haven't looked at the situation closely enough to give a personal take, but I do know that the ANI discussion was closed essentially saying that the majority of reliable sources consider Nazism a far-right ideology, and whether saying such violates FRINGE is up for debate. SkyWarrior 19:20, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Well, that completely sidesteps the question about closing ongoing discussions, though. I think it a bad thing that someone can impose their edit six times, and then accuse anyone else of edit-warring. Regarding the Nasti's place in the political zoo, most sources of course do see them, especially the modern incarnations, as of the right, but their origins are a little more mixed, and the article really should capture that. Anmccaff (talk) 19:55, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

PS: This might sum up my feelings a little more completely. Anmccaff (talk) 20:55, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Alright, I slightly misunderstood the initial question. To actually answer your question: on the face of it, closing the same discussion 5 or 6 times sounds like it's not the right thing to do. However, as I stated before, I haven't looked into the situation closely enough to give an opinion on this, and context does matters. SkyWarrior 00:26, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Alright, Anmccaff, so I looked a little deeper into this. I'm assuming the situation involves this diff, among others, right? If so, then here's my take on it. Let's start off with this: edit warring involves two parties; you are equally guilty of edit warring as Beyond My Ken. Furthermore, I only saw 3 closures, not 5-6.

I initially wrote a long post explaining my view on this, but I realized that I don't know who is right in this situation; to be quite honest, I believe both of you are in the wrong. So I'm just going to answer your initial question, which I believe I finally got correct: is it appropriate to close a discussion 5-6 times? Well, it depends on the situation. If WP:NOTFORUM applies, then yes, I would argue it is appropriate to repeatedly close it. However, if the discussion was closed simply because it was discussed in the past, then I would argue that no, it's not appropriate to repeatedly close a discussion 5-6 times, and thus would constitute edit warring, unless consensus says otherwise, which I do not see afaik. Does this whole thing constitute edit warring in this situation? Well, for starters 3RR was not violated, as I only counted 3 re-closures from BMK, not 5-6. I'm going with a solid "maybe" here, as I honestly can't tell.

I'm also just going to get this out of the way: I'm probably not the best person to talk to about this, as I don't usually deal with edit warring. I only moved the AN3 discussion to ANI because I personally believe it did not belong at AN3, not because of the issue at hand (and to be quite frank, I really don't care about the issue at hand that much). SkyWarrior 04:05, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. One problem with this kinda subject is the whole squick factor can rub off onto other participants if you aren't careful. Anmccaff (talk) 04:51, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Mike McCullough Children

Children in order: Jason McCullough, Michelle McCullough, Mark McCullough — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmccull9039c (talk • contribs) 20:57, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

References

Hi there, Mmccull9039c. Thanks for the source. With that said, WP:BLPNAME applies, and I think it would be best that we don't mention their names, just that McCullough has two sons and a daughter. (Of course, this is up to editor discretion, and at the very least don't put their names in the infobox). SkyWarrior 21:04, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the information! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmccull9039c (talk • contribs) 21:10, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

No problem, and I left something else on your talk page since you claim to be the article subject's child. SkyWarrior 21:12, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Edit source

It was announced in an internal email - I do not yet have a media source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.180.253.107 (talk) 16:14, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Simply saying that it was confirmed in "internal emails" is not a reliable sources, especially not for BLPs. We can't just take your word for it; we need to actually confirm the email exists, and was provided by a legitimate source. SkyWarrior 16:20, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Untitled XVII

Yes its mistak we dont have just one leader we have general secretary Hanibaal lecter (talk) 16:23, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Ali Haidar may not be the only leader (according to you), but he is a leader, so he has to be listed. Don't remove him simply because he's not the only leader. SkyWarrior 16:37, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Untitled XVIII

The information provided in Wikipedia under the current listing is not from me. Some of the information is inaccurate. My campaign website has my accurate biography. How do I proceed with correcting the listing on Wikipedia if I cannot cite my campaign's website as a reference? Please advise. Thanks!

Nicholas Oliver www.OliverForEP.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by OliverForEP (talk • contribs) 17:03, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi OliverForEP. The issue isn't that you were using the campain website as a source; rather, it was the fact that you replaced the article with a copy-paste of the "About Me" page on the website. This is a violation of WP:COPYVIO, and as such had to be removed. You may cite the campain website, just don't copy word-for-word from it.

Also see our policy on conflicts of interest. Thank you. SkyWarrior 17:28, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

cedar point

hi you could of reverted only the coaster number part instead of the whole thing, but isn't gemini 2 coasters, since they are 2 different tracks? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JudgeJake40 (talk • contribs) 02:14, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi JudgeJake40. While the Gemini does consist of two tracks, both tracks share the same name and support system, so it's considered a single coaster, as are all dual-tracked roller coasters. Furthermore, both reliable sources and the park itself consider it a single coaster. SkyWarrior 02:26, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes I think it was a mistake — Preceding unsigned comment added by JudgeJake40 (talk • contribs) 03:20, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

My mistake on Meghan Markle

I misread died (d) in 1908 as born (b) in 1908 and so the math of squeezing 5 generations in that short a time period seemed off. I recognized my mistake right away and removed my talk section. The page edit never took in the first place. I was wrong. I am sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.211.117.192 (talk) 00:55, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

It's fine, we all make mistakes sometimes. I appreciate that you realized your mistake and reverted. Thanks. SkyWarrior 00:57, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Pings on Studio71 talk page

Whoops, prematurely saved. Thanks for fixing. Do I need to add the brackets in or is it already taken care of? JacobMW (talk) 01:04, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

No, JacobMW, you don't need to do anything; {{ping|username}} is all the code needed to ping another user, nothing else needed. See WP:PING for more information. SkyWarrior 01:06, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, SkyWarrior. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Music to yMusic

Changed 'Music' to 'yMusic' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YMusic), because the band is incorrectly named in this paragraph: "In 2011, Clark composed "Proven Badlands," an instrumental piece based on "The Sequel" from her sophomore release Actor, for ensemble Music's album Beautiful Mechanical.[62]"

I honestly didn't know, sorry about that. I reverted myself. SkyWarrior 00:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Untitled XIX

Seriously... how is the TØP page timeline on wikepidia vandalism? It helps people know who was in band at what time, and who was on what album and all the parts they played - very simply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiEditsAnnon (talk • contribs) 16:51, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

@WikiEditsAnnon: The timeline wasn't the vandalism; this edit, however, was, and since I was using Huggle I ended up reverting all your edits to the page.

With that said, your edits are clearly controversial, and given your tone I would suggest you stop re-adding the contested edits in (in other words, stop adding timelines to articles). Instead, I highly advise that you discuss these changes, or you could end up blocked for edit warring and/or disruptive editing. SkyWarrior 17:01, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Lissy

Thanks for moving Lissy (actress). I think Lissy may also require a dab since there are Lissy commune and Lissy (film). There is no primary topic, I believe. Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 18:28, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I would agree that there appears to be no primary topic. I'm going to be bold and move Lissy to Lissy (commune) and make Lissy the disambiguation page. SkyWarrior 18:32, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

@Let There Be Sunshine:  Done. SkyWarrior 18:38, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

I have reverted your edit on 'Canon EOS 40D'

Hello User:SkyWarrior,

I have add the link to Photoshop Lightroom again in the article Canon EOS 40D, as the article already exist. It is the link to 'Adobe Photoshop Lightroom' and NOT 'Adobe Lightroom CC'. Please leave the link, except the article 'Adobe Photoshop Lightroom' will be deleted, or discuss it beforehand.

--GodeNehler (talk) 21:06, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

That was the result of a mass rollback from a disruptive IP, essentially because Spartaz initially removed the link per a recent AfD, and I was trying to uphold the AfD result. I'm fine with this specific revert. SkyWarrior 21:10, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the Information. --GodeNehler (talk) 22:23, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Microsoft Photos

Hey. Erm, would you please double-check your reversion in the Microsoft Photos article? The change and the edit summary don't match, and I don't know which one is wrong.

1. The edit summary reads: per a recent AfD, there should not be an article on Lightroom, so linking is not necessary
2. The actual change is restoring this sentence: "that could be uninstalled from the system".

I mean ... I double-checked and triple-checked because this isn't something you would do. I though maybe MediaWiki has gone haywire. (Although if it was true, double-checking wouldn't have helped anyway.)

FleetCommand (Speak your mind!) 15:22, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

See my reply above. Long story short: mass rollback oversight. It was something on my end, and I have thus reverted. SkyWarrior 19:52, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. FleetCommand (Speak your mind!) 07:34, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

James May alias Dingleberry handpump

Helllo

You have reverted my changes to James Daniel Mays article, concerning the addition of his 1 week old new alias given to him by his two co-presenters due to an Identity theft.

I do not know why you took that action nor do I think you are failiar with the source material.

Sincerely yanninator — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yanninator-ofc (talk • contribs) 15:56, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

ACC tool access request approved

SkyWarrior, thank you for your interest in the account creation process. I have verified that you are identified to the Wikimedia Foundation and approved your request.

You may now access the interface here pending a tool root marking your account as identified in the tool database. Before you begin handling requests, please ensure you have read and understood the account creation guide and username policy to familiarise yourself with the process.

Please subscribe yourself to the private ACC mailing list following the instructions on that page. I also advise that you also join us on IRC #wikipedia-en-accounts ^connect where a bot informs us when new account requests come in and you can get real time advice on how to handle requests.

Please note failure to correctly assess requests will result in suspension of tool access. Account creation is not a race, and each one should be handled diligently and thoroughly. Releasing personally identifying information (such as IP and email addresses), whether intentionally or unintentionally, is treated very seriously and will generally result in immediate suspension.

Currently you are allowed to create up to six accounts per day, and you won't be able to create an account with a similar name to that of another user; these requests are marked as "Flagged user needed" on the interface. However, if you reach the limit frequently, you can request the account creator permission at WP:PERM/ACC.

Please don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for participating in the account creation process. Again welcome!  Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:43, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Hello SkyWarrior: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, —MRD2014 ^{Merry Christmas!} 02:06, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

WestWood

You deleted my changes they were not wrong please put them back

Respectfully, VoteBingBong — Preceding unsigned comment added by VoteBingBong (talk • contribs) 01:41, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

what exactly was wrong with my edit?

I don't get exactly what is wrong with my edit on Wall-e. how exactly was it "Unconstructive"? let me know what I did wrong.

Nothing was wrong, that was just me looking at the edit wrong on Huggle. I have reverted, sorry. SkyWarrior 18:24, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

OK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:183:C602:4020:8C7A:72F5:1D4B:9F2E (talk) 18:27, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Legit edit

Hey...I made a legit edit, not a test, and you cut it. Can you please re-add it so I don't have to redo it? Wiki article was for "Paul W. Rainwater". Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjgreen55 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Rjgreen55. Your edit was reverted because this edit appeared to be an editing test. Unfortunately, this change was the only change I saw when using Huggle, which I would argue was rightfully reverted, but the software appears to have also reverted legitimate edits by you, edits I did not know about. I do apologize for that, and I will partially revert, but I would like to check the edits first before doing so, if you don't mind (and if you don't do so before me). SkyWarrior 18:28, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

I saw nothing wrong with the edits, bar the image. I have partially reverted. SkyWarrior 18:32, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Steve Bannon

- No political offices - No business experience - Increasing alienation - Failure to win in Alabama STEVE BANNON IS NOT GOING TO RUN! http://www.newsweek.com/steve-bannon-not-running-president-2020-trump-756264 Snobbish editors such as yourself need to leave well enough alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.122.172.42 (talk) 21:10, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the source, I will simply move Bannon to the "Declined" section now. In the meantime, may I suggest you read WP:NPA? SkyWarrior 21:12, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Request

Hi, could you please join in these two move discussions – Bhavana (actress) and Robin Hood (2009 film). Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 18:05, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I'll have a look at the discussions when I get home; I might not !vote in them, but I do volunteer to close them when the time comes to do so. Also, Let There Be Sunshine, you may want to read WP:CANVASS; it's generally unwise to randomly message users if they a) haven't edited the article extensively, b) don't know a lot about the article subject, or c) aren't directly mentioned in the discussion or took part in a past, relevant discussion. SkyWarrior 19:47, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi, me again :) You may close this discussion. Page already moved since the makers officially changed the name. Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 18:56, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Never mind. It's now moved back. Seems like it's unstable presently. But please look at this discussion as time favors. Thank you. Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 19:01, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Article Tabarnia

There is a mistake in your reversion. I made a correction on the article, citing true information from the single source of that article. The previous version was invented. A copy and paste from the website www.bcnisnotcat.es. Filiprino (talk) 18:39, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

There was no mistake, Filiprino. The current version of the article is properly sourced to multiple reliable sources and is much more expansive than your version of the article, which is a single sentence and is unsourced, except for an external link to a blog site. Also, I checked, and I cannot find how the current version is a copyvio. SkyWarrior 18:46, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

I am sorry to say that the article was not properly sourced because the sources employed are not reliable. The website promoting the supposed «Tabarnia» concept is https://www.bcnisnotcat.es which you recognize to be a blog, so it is not any source of ground truth. Three out of eighteen references are from that blog. The rest of the sources employed are secondary sources without any primary source to refer to in order to check basic information like members, promotors, organizations or political parties. Currently there is no verificable information supporting Tabarnia as anything supported by anyone. Filiprino (talk) 18:55, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Sky Warrior

Sky Warrior, I admire you greatly and believe that you are a very respectable being. May you forever prosper!!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whoute28 (talk • contribs) 04:52, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for that. SkyWarrior 04:55, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Sunflower personnel

The Beach Boys album "Sunflower" and the individual song articles indicate that Dennis Wilson did in fact play drums and Bruce Johnston was on bass and keyboards. A lot of the journalists fail to fact check and realize the truth: The Beach Boys did in fact play on their own records, contrary to popular belief, and an often erroneous belief is that Dennis was replaced exclusively by studio drummers. I think you sent me the message by mistake. 04:28, 4 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.221.128.210 (talk)

Not a mistake; simply claiming a source exists without providing such is not how things work around here. I encourage you to provide the source you are referring to, but until then, it is assumed that the source does not exist, and therefore the claims are unsourced. Please do not readd the content without adding some sort of reliable source confirming it; simply claiming such a source exists is not enough. See WP:V for more details. Thank you. SkyWarrior 04:32, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

I've added some citation needed templates for the time being and please don't take my words as personal attacks by any means. Until a reliable source is found, they'll have to do.203.221.128.210 (talk) 04:33, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm not taking your words as attacks, but simply adding a "citation needed" template is not a workaround for this; you either provide a source when making the edit or not add the content at all. Continuing adding the content without providing the source you say exists could result in a block for adding unsourced content, so I would suggest you stop. SkyWarrior 04:36, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

My pleasure

Let me know if you spot any other trouble and I'll take a look. :-) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 04:14, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Will do. ;-) SkyWarrior 04:14, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

re: Anthony Weiner

• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anthony_Weiner&type=revision&diff=826750870&oldid=826750800

Dear SkyWarrior,

I have seen his doing so in the video, but am unsure how to use this as a reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Msw0odRETPE

Can you help me?

--Mick2 (talk) 20:35, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there Mick2. See WP:REF, which will show you how to add references to articles. There are many ways to do so, but for beginners one can add a ref by simply adding ref tags between the source wanting to be references (in other words, insert this when adding a reference: <ref> your source </ref>). A more complex way of adding a source would be to use, in this case, Template:Cite AV media or Template:Cite web (the visual editor can streamline this process for you).

With that said, since the person who uploaded the YouTube video provided does not actually own the rights to the video, you cannot use that YouTube video as a source per our copyright policy. You can, however, cite the C-SPAN video where the clip originated, which is located at this link here.

If you have any more questions, then please let me know. SkyWarrior 21:05, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

American ‘English’ -v- English

Hello,

I’ll dumb this down as much as I can but........

THERE IS NO SUCH LANGUAGE AS BRITISH ENGLISH !

There’s English and American English. Look at the international book country indexing system.

Why would you re-edit someone who makes accurate edits?

Weird.

Regards, Dave

An Englishman from England which is part of Great Britain which is part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and hopefully soon no longer part of the proposed United States of Europe...lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.9.4.252 (talk) 20:55, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

"English" is the entire language itself being spoken. With that, there are many different versions of English, including American and British. Calling British English just "English" would just be ignoring the other versions of English, and would suggest that BrE is the official form of English, which it is not. SkyWarrior 21:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

ygm

Hello, SkyWarrior. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

TonyBallioni (talk) 19:13, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Replied (what I said should suffice for what you want. ) SkyWarrior 19:24, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Untitled XX

Please see User talk:TonyBallioni/Archive 15#Sarah Jane Brown: I'd undo the close, relist, and continue with the progressive closes of subsections that were never going to make it, as Primefac was doing, for another week or two before closing. Please keep the discussion in one place as much as possible, i.e. TonyBallioni's talk page for the time being. Thanks. --Francis Schonken (talk) 06:55, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Noted. Will look into and possibly respond when I get the chance (which may not be for a few hours, and if I even have anything to say at all). SkyWarrior 11:44, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Put my edits back!

You don't understand!

We're going to lose our net neutrality within a month!

If we don't do something before April 23, 2018, they're going to take our internet freedom away! --LooneyTunerIan (talk) 03:35, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I completely understand the situation LooneyTunerIan. However our policies and guidelines such as WP:NPOV, WP:RS, WP:NOTFORUM must be followed, irregardless of the importance of the siutation. Your edits violate those policies and guidelines, and as such I will not reinstate them; I also don't encourage you to re-add the content yourself without making any policy-abiding changes, or it could be reverted again. SkyWarrior 04:18, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Talk

Hi. Fripthesamuria (talk) 22:27, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi there Fripthesamuria. SkyWarrior 04:34, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

List of other notable roads in Toronto listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of other notable roads in Toronto. Since you had some involvement with the List of other notable roads in Toronto redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 18:43, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Repeated messages that I've vandalised the page "Samuel Lane"

Hi SKyWarrior

In the past week, I've gotten at least two notifications (from you?) that I've vandalised the page "Samuel Lane" because apparently the editor had been using my IP address. I do not remember visiting, let alone editing, the page until I received these unusual notifications and I am honestly perplexed. I did not actually edit "Samuel Lane" personally and no-one else has been using my device, so I do not understand why I am being conflated with the person making unauthorized edits on 'Samuel Lane". I feel that this is an error. Please find a solution as soon as possible as these notifications are confusing, fo not pertain to me, and are becoming frequent.

Thankyou. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.62.28.16 (talk) 04:03, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

It may be true that you yourself did not make the edits, however someone from your IP address did. From what it looks like, the IP address you are using is a public one, and as such many different people can use it. Chances are good someone else made the edits in question, and you just so happen to use the computer after them. Really there are two things you can really do: create an account so any messages you receive pertain to you and you only, or just simply ignore the messages. I would also encourage you to use a private network if you are not doing so already. SkyWarrior 17:15, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Editing External links of GSM article

Hello,

I would like to add YateBTS documentation ( https://wiki.yatebts.com/index.php/GSM_Concepts ) as external links to the wiki GSM article.

I've read the documentation and seems they have been explaining pretty well Radio/GSM concepts.

What do you think about that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul.bichis (talk • contribs) 14:04, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, SkyWarrior. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Bill Oddie

Bill Oddie is my granddad and you removed me off his page lol

go watch his episode of Who Do You Think You Are?

I'm the smaller baby.

Put me back on his page.

82.35.83.80 (talk) 08:57, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Untitled XXI

Hi I am Penguins Ball. I am here to tell you, that GSIA is real. I saw GSIA as an unfinished page, so I done some research, and added this page. It is not any kind of promotion. So please add the page back. Thank you for understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Penguins Ball (talk • contribs) 06:19, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Penguins Ball. Excluding the fact that you unilaterally converted a disambiguation page into your own article and the fact that the changes appear to be promotional, you have failed to establish notability for your article. If you want an article on the "GSIA" as described by you, you must first prove that it is notable enough to have its own article. This can be done by providing several, third-party reliable sources, which a single link to the website is not. SkyWarrior 06:34, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

January 2021

Hello, Pinoy pop is need to redirected it on P-pop beacuse Pakistan Pop need to redirected their article so Pinoy pop and Pakistan Pop is same in shortly name (P-pop) so please we need to take action about this let's redirected it. Thank you Mruizkr34 (talk) 06:47, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Please Mruizkr34 (talk) 06:49, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. SkyWarrior 06:54, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the information!

Thanks for letting me know about the policy that "a checkuser cannot confirm whether Bmv maximuz and the IP are the same user due to privacy concerns" in your reply on the Administrator intervention against vandalism page. That definitely makes sense. palindrome§ǝɯoɹpuᴉןɐd 06:18, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

No problem. Wikipedia:CheckUser#CheckUser and the privacy policy has more information in regards to this. SkyWarrior 06:22, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Kallar

Hello Skywarrior. Please restore the old neutral version of the page. Thanjavur siva is blocked as a sockpuppet. Sockpuppet edits must be reverted. His edits are not neutral and and promotes caste pride which is leading to caste violence everywhere. These casteists don't understand this. It also has unreliable depreciated sources tag. Kindly revert the sock edits. Thanks 2409:4072:6C8A:C8A5:7F09:EF7B:213A:F26 (talk) 06:41, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

2012 Pro Bowl edit

Dear SkyWarrior,

It's Ash. I just wanted to let you know that the info I wrote is correct for the 2012 Pro Bowl. I hope you will understand that I had to change it because in the play by play, the plays were incorrect and in a different order. I mean no offense, but I don't think you know anything about American Football.(Not football as in like the Europe version of soccer.) I hope you understand. Have a great day!

108.54.78.250 (talk) 22:02, 21 January 2021 (UTC)Your Wikifriend, Ash

Now I'll admit I'm not the most well versed in American football, but I can read news articles, and contrary to your edits this article from ESPN provided as a source in the 2012 Pro Bowl article explicitly says that AFC defeated the NFC. Please stop adding blatantly incorrect information into articles. SkyWarrior 22:28, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Al Barrow updates issue

I am not 100% how you edit a page and then supply all back up info. I am Al Barrow and made the edits. I understand why you do this to stop anyone adding what they want for other people but I wish the information to be reposted please.

How do I confirm this is me and that the information I edited is correct.

Also can I get a copy of that info for further edits once I have figured out how to do it on the page.

I apologise for my ill education in this matter and I understand why you do this but any advice would be great thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.169.135.252 (talk) 18:03, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello. If you really are Al Barrow, then I recommend you see our page about writing autobiographies. Although it is not prohibited that one edit articles about themselves, it is not recommended for you to do so.

With that said, in order for information to be added into Wikipedia articles (especially in regards to articles about living persons as is the case here), it needs to be backed up with reliable sources. If the info is not properly sourced, then it cannot be added. Saying that you are the article's subject and that the info you added is correct is not enough.

If you can provide reliable sources that what you added is correct, then feel free to suggest your requested changes to this page using the following template: {{request edit}}.

Thank you. SkyWarrior 21:35, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Minor mistyping

I think you meant to write "so people don't forget to include it" or "so people remember not to omit it" at WT:Centralized discussion. --Fyrisdal (talk) 09:16, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I actually meant to put "so people remember not to omit it" intentionally. Though I will admit that what you said does make more sense. SkyWarrior 17:30, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Ancient souls

Hurry up then Luke. How much longer can you all keep up the lies? There isn't one human left here. Jack the ultimate x — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:76E7:2E00:940F:E1BA:A31E:6668 (talk) 03:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Kallar

Hello Skywarrior. User talk:Ihaveabandonedmychild is spreading wrong messages, which creates the violation to all the pages including Kallar (caste) page. And the given link also not correct and not valid. So please block him permanently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by விக்னேஷ்வர் பா மாளுசுத்தியார் (talk • contribs)

@விக்னேஷ்வர் பா மாளுசுத்தியார்: I have not looked into the edits in questions, but I will say that I am not an administrator and do not have the ability to block people. SkyWarrior 04:40, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

the RAIDERNATION

I am a reporter that's covered this story from the beginning of the saga in 1996. You proposed to "delete" my article and you are completely wrong about the pretense and have zero background information about the history and truth about the slogan "RAIDERNATION." You are censoring the truth, free speech and didn't even give me a chance to edit the page. You said I had until May 2!?! Why is the article down on April 28? You are playing favorites and you are actively censoring multiple opinions. Wikipedia is supposed to be an online encyclopedia yet you're taking sides and have allowed a lie to perpetrate as truth. There is more than one page for a lot of topics but you assumed my article wasn't accurate when it was with first hand accounts of my investigations. Wikipedia's community guidelines state you are "hands off" so why are you so "hands on" with my article which is the TRUTH!!! AND you had the nerve to delete my photos which are MY PROPERTY. THEY DON'T BELONG TO ANYONE ELSE!! Who are you and why do you have a personal vendetta against my publication of the TRUTH. The other page is a LIE. And...the original brand is RAIDERNATION NOT Raider Nation.

I am extremely disappointed and thought there was some authenticity to Wikipedia. Word on the street amongst "programmers" is that a FEW of you play favorites and moderate what you think is best. So much for truth and journalism. You've made this process a disgrace. Shame ON YOU!

--FlowerChild1969 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flowerchild1969 (talk • contribs) 02:48, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Flowerchild1969. Please see our policy on verifiability; we simply cannot put information into our articles if it is not reliably sourced. Simply saying something is true is not enough and is considered original research, which is not allowed. You may also be interested in the essay located at WP:NOTTRUTH.

Furthermore, you seem to be yelling at the wrong person; the person who proposed the deletion of your article is Discospinster , not me. Thank you. SkyWarrior 03:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Deleting My Article

Furthermore...I've documented the so-called deadline for editing my article which is accurate and throughly investigated was May 2, 2021. But in your playing "GOD" with the truth you deleted it early and then redirected it to the false page? Raider Nation and The RAIDERNATION are legal names with distinct differences. They are not the same. Please remove the entire page and DO NOT REDIRECT MY ARTICLE to that of the other. I am going to be sure to follow-up on any dispute process I am afforded as a reporter. You obviously are into circumventing the First Amendment rights of the U.S. Constitution making Wikipedia Fake News. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flowerchild1969 (talk • contribs) 03:58, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@Flowerchild1969: I have not made any edits to the Raider Nation article or the The RAIDERNATION redirect; my only involvement in this is warning you for edit warring. Please read what I have said in the above section. (And, by the way, the First Amendment only protects you from government censorship; it does not apply to private entities such as Wikipedia). Thank you. SkyWarrior 04:07, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Deleting My Article

Thanks for clarifying the obvious. How are you a public/private entity? This is a non-profit organization that has you censoring content? Why? Why you? So...Wikipedia is an "online encyclopedia" that welcomes contribution as long as it meets SkyWarrior and DiscoSpinster's specifications. That is absurd. You lack understanding. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flowerchild1969 (talk • contribs) 04:36, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Linking my article in external links section

I have written an article on Dalhousie University on my website as per the best of my knowledge and experience. A part of that article has been contributed to a Dalhousie University Wikipedia page. I linked that paragraph to my written content for in-depth study and a better understanding of the reader. Can I also Feature my link to the external links section of the Dalhousie University Page of Wikipedia or not — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhavik Bansal 777 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Alice Cooper's Genre's of music

Some of Alice's song sound like indie/pop rock, and punk to me so that's why I put that in.

Thanks

Thanks for the assistance in fixing the move issues! I've protected P-pop to prevent further headaches. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:05, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

No problem! I've dealt with this exact thing a back in January and it appears that this whole thing has happened before then as well. Permanent move protection was a good call. SkyWarrior 02:09, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Google drive

In a recent edit revert you stated, "Don't use google drive". While this editor concurs the use of Google Drive is not ideal, the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) has moved its access to the links to its Highway Resolutions (highway history) and Highway Referencing (highway details and mileage) to Google Drive, see DATA, TECHNOLOGY & ANALYTICS DIVISION: DATA AND ANALYTICS. While at least some of the previous direct links to some of these documents still work, the main webpages for looking them up no longer link to the desired information (Old link to highway referencing & Old link to highway resolutions). Given that Google Drive is were UDOT posts these essential reference documents, how do you suggest this issue be handled? An Errant Knight (talk) 17:23, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

@An Errant Knight: I reverted my edit. I may have incorrectly assumed that there is no good reason why Google Drive should be used. Truthfully there’s no real policy that explicitly says one can’t use Google Drive, and since UDOT officially uses Drive to upload all their documents, then I suppose it’s fine to use in this instance.

Now, if someone else says that Google Drive shouldn’t be used, then try looking for an archive of the previous reference on the Wayback Machine or other Internet archive site. SkyWarrior 15:26, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

@SkyWarrior: Thanks for the response, and all you other work! An Errant Knight (talk) 19:10, 30 June 2021 (UTC)